Offical The Legend of Zelda Thread

i rather have miyamato make a new ip instead of an average sequel.

 

I had a really cool idea for a sequel a while back that would completely turn the series on its head. But I'm not sure how much I should talk about it though, since I may be getting work in the game industry someday, and don't know if I should be babbling about it at this time.

 

I always thought the Hyrule of OoT was much worse, maybe it was just the art style, but OoT felt a lot darker than ALttP. Both games were great though, I really hope we get another Zelda on the Wii, one built from the ground up for the Wii.

 

The dark world thing was done in too many Zelda games. Hell, Twilight Princess argueably even had a Dark Version of the world as well.

 

You can't post that and then not tell us. At least give us a basic idea of what you thought of.

 

yeah come on tell...or at least give us a hint

i like cute zelda maybe's it b/c im a girl ...i love wind waker and phantom hour glass style.im not really into the scary and dark the real world has enough of that to go around thank you very much....but i never played the other zelda's because i was either not born yet or i didnt have a clue what an n64 was at the time but i guess i could learn to like a zelda game if it mixes cute and spooky right!

golden you just have to come to terms with the fact new ips just arent the money makers like established ips are
nintendo can make a mario, pokemon, etc. game knowink they can recoup their loses making the game....pikmin not so much the only reason that game was made was because it was miyamoto's game had it been intern #5's idea do you think it would have made it past r&d stage not likely.

and nintendo does make new ips but um yeah did you buy elite beat agents or pikmin or other games like them........did your friends and family........anyone at your job/school if the answer is no then you have just answered the question why nintendo and everybody else plays it safe.

 

Alrighty, I'll give you the basic premise... What if Ganon knew about the prophecy that Link and Zelda were supposed to defeat him, and he managed to find Link while he was still a child, taking him under his tutelage? What if by the time Link realized the error of his ways and his destiny as the legendary hero, he'd already been branded with the mistrust of not only the people of Hyrule, but the Master Sword itself for the evil deeds he'd helped Ganon commit?

The game's main structure would revolve around making a name for yourself as a benevolent hero to the Hylians, and un-doing your reputation as one of Ganon's pawns, so that you can earn the right to wield the Master Sword. To do that, you'd have to traverse the massive, Oblivion-sized land of Hyrule, righting wrongs as you find them, winning over the hearts and minds of your countrymen. And of course, you'd crawl a few dungeons, collect some awesome tools, and rescue a princess in the process. That's all I'm comfortable revealing at this time though.

 

I'd like to see a game set after Adventure of Link and see New Hyrule in 3D for once.

 

There really is no chronological order in the Zelda series... It's always a new legend with a new version of Hyrule and it's inhabitants, sometimes with vague references to past versions. There was a time when I was like the many who believe it's possible to chronoligically order the Zelda series, but after so much frustration and plot holes, I came to the inevitable conclusion-- it's not worth trying, especially since it's not even possible to do it. The way I see it now, the series basically reboots itself on each system with a few exceptions.

 

It's pretty damn easy to place the games developed by Nintendo EAD in chronological order IMO.

Ocarina of Time --> Majora's Mask --> Twilight Princess --> The Wind Waker --> Phantom Hourglass --> A Link to the Past --> Link's Awakening --> the Legend of Zelda --> Adventure of Link.

It's the other games such as the ones developed by Flagship, that f**k everything up. That's why I don't even consider them in continuity. Keeps it nice and simple.

Or you can just simply beleive that there are split timelines

 

Don't be like Michael Moore and ignore things that don't support your theories.

 

There are just too many plotholes though. The best that you can possibly do is say that some games use others for vague history, but they do not actually continue storylines set up by other games in the series, and they don't try to keep a coherent mythology or canon. If you wanted to chronologically order the Zelda games, you could pretty much put them in any order you wanted as long as Ocarina of Time came first, but I've heard some people argue that even that is not a rock-solid chapter 1.

The conclusion I came to is that the Zelda series does not really have a chronological order, because Nintendo never made a strong effort to form a continuity. They just said "to heck with it" and did whatever they wanted, and sadly, some people are still trying to make sense of it all to no avail. The way I see it, it's called the Legend of Zelda because each incarnation of the series is like a new legend about Link, Ganon, and Zelda. Legends evolve as time and generations pass, and the story changes hands. You could have one group of people who tells a story one way, and another that tells it a completely different way. And that's my view of the Zelda series. It is in a constant state of restarting and reinventing itself, because it's essentially the same basic story every time but with a new way of telling it. Link rescues the princess, and kills Ganon. Simple enough, but there are a whole lot of things that change with each game.

 

All the LOZ games take place in the same Hyrule.

 

Not really. The geography of Hyrule changes drastically in each game.

 

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/15194.html

 

It's as Timstuff said, Nintendo really made an effort involving continuity so I think it's really up to the fans to decide their own timelines until Nintendo does something about it, which they most likely never will. Though there are a few certain things:

Ocarina of Time --> Majora's Mask --> Twilight Princess

The Wind Waker --> Phantom Hourglass

Legend of Zelda --> Adventure of Link

A Link to the Past --> Link's Awakening

The Minish Cap --> Four Swords --> Four Swords Adventures

Oracle of Seasons <--> Oracle of Ages

 

I think that the Hyrule of the games before The Wind Waker and the Hyrule of the ones after it are two different Hyrules.

 

If you played all the games you would know why.

 

The Link I posted explains all that shizzle.

 

I don't consider Four Swords Adventure a real game. If anything you can combine it with Four Swords. It was basically just a drawn out version of it that was sold separately since FS came with Link to the Past for GBA.

 

timstuff pretty good......you might just want to file an application with nintendo cause i dont think you could create a zelda game w/o the approval of mr. miyamoto. hippie hunters right there is some sort of link between all the links.somewhere i read miyamoto saying Nintendo has a file or book that contains all the zelda games(not sure if the gameboy games are included) and how the go chronolgically it was on joystiq somewhere but i cant remember what it was under. but i guess part of the charm of the games is figuring out which one is the true link and which one are the sucessors. also i believe each link, zelda, and gannon are different their not the same each iteration of the series......or i could be completely wrong but that's nothing new xD

 

I'd like to see more than just Ganon going after the Triforce. If this legend was true then I would image the Gorons, Zoras, and others would like to get their hands on the Triforce. Either so they can have the power or that some other group doesn't get their hands on it.

So Link might not need to complete 3 temples to get access to the Master Sword. He may have found 2 but a forest thief may have the other one. So Link must track down this thief and get it. Link could at any moment be attacked by assassins who want his "temple jewel". He may create an alliance with the Zoras or Gorons, each choice leads to multiple endings. Which would encourage replaying the game again.

Usuually in Zelda its can you help me Yes or No? You need to select "Yes", the no leads to nothing.

It would try to get rid of the predictability that Zelda is sinking into. New gameplay is great but its too predictable. In fact I would get rid of the Gorons/Zoras since that is just being lazy.

Once Link finds the Master Sword he would [1] be either be betrayed by whatever character he trusted to help him (this character would carry extra weapons - cause c'mon no one can carry that many, know where to find certain items and enter areas Link can't enter). Link would then be frozen in stone until Zelda breaks the curse put on whoever wanted the Triforce. For the second part of the game Zelda is Link's partner.

or [2] Agahnim would appear and use magic to put Link out of commission and take the MS. Zelda would appear and help him in the 2nd half of the quest.

So players could switch to Zelda for some part of the game. I know that gameplay style isn't original but the series could use Link/Zelda working together to create that "romance" and breaks the predictability.

Link and Zelda's first adventure together would be getting a horse and stealing the Master Sword from whoever has it. To change the landscape in Hyrule, Link would've been "asleep" for a few months and now the regions of Hyrule have gone to war going after the territory that has the Master Sword and is searching for the 8 keystones that will give them access to the Triforce.

The final boss battle would be a 3 way battle between Link, Ganon and Agahnim (or some wizard). You could defeat Ganon first or Agahnim. Each would have a different ending.